This report contains results from the latest survey of secondary school pupils in England in years 7 to 11 (mostly aged 11 to 15), focusing on smoking, drinking and drug use. It covers a range of topics including prevalence, habits, attitudes, and wellbeing. This survey is usually run every two years, however, due to the impact that the Covid pandemic had on school opening and attendance, it was not possible to run the survey as initially planned in 2020; instead it was delivered in the 2021 school year. In 2021 additional questions were also included relating to the impact of Covid. They covered how pupil's took part in school learning in the last school year (September 2020 to July 2021), and how often pupil's met other people outside of school and home. Results of analysis covering these questions have been presented within parts of the report and associated data tables. It includes this summary report showing key findings, excel tables with more detailed outcomes, technical appendices and a data quality statement. An anonymised record level file of the underlying data on which users can carry out their own analysis will be made available via the UK Data Service later in 2022 (see link below).

Contains a set of data tables for each part of the Smoking, Drinking and Drug Use among Young People in England, 2021 report

The PATH Study was launched in 2011 to inform the Food and Drug Administration's regulatory activities under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (TCA). The PATH Study is a collaboration between the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Center for Tobacco Products (CTP), Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The study sampled over 150,000 mailing addresses across the United States to create a national sample of people who use or do not use tobacco. 45,971 adults and youth constitute the first (baseline) wave, Wave 1, of data collected by this longitudinal cohort study. These 45,971 adults and youth along with 7,207 "shadow youth" (youth ages 9 to 11 sampled at Wave 1) make up the 53,178 participants that constitute the Wave 1 Cohort. Respondents are asked to complete an interview at each follow-up wave. Youth who turn 18 by the current wave of data collection are considered "aged-up adults" and are invited to complete the Adult Interview. Additionally, "shadow youth" are considered "aged-up youth" upon turning 12 years old, when they are asked to complete an interview after parental consent. At Wave 4, a probability sample of 14,098 adults, youth, and shadow youth ages 10 to 11 was selected from the civilian, noninstitutionalized population (CNP) at the time of Wave 4. This sample was recruited from residential addresses not selected for Wave 1 in the same sampled Primary Sampling Unit (PSU)s and segments using similar within-household sampling procedures. This "replenishment sample" was combined for estimation and analysis purposes with Wave 4 adult and youth respondents from the Wave 1 Cohort who were in the CNP at the time of Wave 4. This combined set of Wave 4 participants, 52,731 participants in total, forms the Wave 4 Cohort. At Wave 7, a probability sample of 14,863 adults, youth, and shadow youth ages 9 to 11 was selected from the CNP at the time of Wave 7. This sample was recruited from residential addresses not selected for Wave 1 or Wave 4 in the same sampled PSUs and segments using similar within-household sampling procedures. This "second replenishment sample" was combined for estimation and analysis purposes with the Wave 7 adult and youth respondents from the Wave 4 Cohorts who were at least age 15 and in the CNP at the time of Wave 7. This combined set of Wave 7 participants, 46,169 participants in total, forms the Wave 7 Cohort. Please refer to the Restricted-Use Files User Guide that provides further details about children designated as "shadow youth" and the formation of the Wave 1, Wave 4, and Wave 7 Cohorts. Dataset 0002 (DS0002) contains the data from the State Design Data. This file contains 7 variables and 82,139 cases. The state identifier in the State Design file reflects the participant's state of residence at the time of selection and recruitment for the PATH Study. Dataset 1011 (DS1011) contains the data from the Wave 1 Adult Questionnaire. This data file contains 2,021 variables and 32,320 cases. Each of the cases represents a single, completed interview. Dataset 1012 (DS1012) contains the data from the Wave 1 Youth and Parent Questionnaire. This file contains 1,431 variables and 13,651 cases. Dataset 1411 (DS1411) contains the Wave 1 State Identifier data for Adults and has 5 variables and 32,320 cases. Dataset 1412 (DS1412) contains the Wave 1 State Identifier data for Youth (and Parents) and has 5 variables and 13,651 cases. The same 5 variables are in each State Identifier dataset, including PERSONID for linking the State Identifier to the questionnaire and biomarker data and 3 variables designating the state (state Federal Information Processing System (FIPS), state abbreviation, and full name of the state). The State Identifier values in these datasets represent participants' state of residence at the time of Wave 1, which is also their state of residence at the time of recruitment. Dataset 1611 (DS1611) contains the Tobacco Universal Product Code (UPC) data from Wave 1. This data file contains 32 variables and 8,601 cases. This file contains UPC values on the packages of tobacco products used or in the possession of adult respondents at the time of Wave 1. The UPC values can be used to identify and validate the specific products used by respondents and augment the analyses of the characteristics of tobacco products used

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed. The purpose of this was to leverage an existing randomized controlled trial of The Second Step anti-bullying program, which was implemented when the sample of students was in middle school, by measuring related aggressive behaviors (e.g. bullying, cyberbullying, sexual violence) during the high school years. The objectives of this study were to determine treatment effects of the Second Step middle school program on reductions in youth aggression (including bullying), sexual violence, substance use, and teen dating violence when in high school, as well as to assess middle school belonging as a mediator of these treatment effects on targeted problem behaviors in high school. Demographic variables included as part of this collection are students' age, gender, race, and household characteristics. The collection contains 3 SPSS data files: analysis4_de-identified_2.sav (n=2143; 304 variables) RCT-WAVE-1-4-ITEMS_RECODED_de-identified_2.sav (n=4718; 741 variables) RCT---WAVE-5-7-ITEMS_RECODED_de-identified_2.sav (n=3064; 887 variables)

Background: Investigating drug utilization in large and unselected samples of children and adolescents is an important component of public health monitoring. Most existing studies in this field focused on any drug use (i.e., ≥1 prescription of a certain drug) although chronic drug use may be more relevant. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of prevalence and types of prescription drugs used repeatedly in children and adolescents in Germany in 2016.Methods: We used the German Pharmacoepidemiological Research Database (GePaRD)—a claims database covering ∼20% of the German population. We included children and adolescents aged 0–17 years and assessed repeated use of prescription drugs (≥3 prescriptions in 2016) on two levels: therapeutic subgroups (ATC 2nd level) and chemical substances (ATC 5th level). Analyses were stratified by sex and age groups (

The Juvenile Residential Facility Census (JRFC), which is conducted biennially, collects basic information on juvenile residential facility characteristics, including security, capacity and crowding, injuries and deaths in custody, and facility ownership and operation. The JRFC also includes questions about facility type (such as detention center, training school, ranch, or group home) and residential services provided by the facility (such as independent living, foster care, or other arrangements), and detailed questions about mental health, substance abuse, and educational services provided to young persons. In 2016, the JRFC was divided into seven sections: General facility information Mental health services Educational services Substance abuse services Events in the 30 days prior to the census reference date Deaths in the year prior to the census reference date Space shared with other facilities Congress requires the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to report annually on the number of deaths of juveniles in custody; the JRFC gathers this information and offers a portrait of the nation's juvenile facilities. The census reference date was the fourth Wednesday in October.

Abstract: The study aimed to estimate the prevalence of health indicators among adolescents in São Luís, Maranhão State, Brazil, in 2016. The analysis included sociodemographic conditions, life habits, body composition, sleep quality, physical activity, cognitive performance, and suicide risk in 2,515 adolescents 18 to 19 years of age. The adolescents belonged to the 1997/1998 birth cohort or were included retrospectively using the SINASC (Brazilian Information System on Live Births) database. The adolescents were mainly from economic class C (50.1%), 69.5% were in school, 40.3% were working, and 25.2% were neither studying nor working; 60.3% had been robbed, and 48.7% had parents who were separated or divorced; 19.4% showed harmful or excessive alcohol consumption or probable addiction, 19.1% had used or were using illicit drugs, 53.7% reported poor sleep quality, 40.8% reported frequent headaches, 34.3% reported more than five hours of daily screen time, and 4.1% showed high suicide risk. Prevalence of high blood pressure was 12%, and 6% were obese. Girls were more physically inactive (80.7%) and showed greater percentage of high (15.8%) and very high body fat (21.5%), while boys showed greater prevalence of high blood pressure (21.2%) and lower prevalence of physical inactivity (40.9%). High prevalence rates of health risk factors increase the adolescents’ vulnerability, exposing these individuals earlier to factors leading to diseases and other health problems.

The Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) asks a sole adult in a random sample of households about their, or their household's, experience of crime victimisation in the previous 12 months. These are recorded in the victim form data file (VF). A wide range of questions are then asked, covering demographics and crime-related subjects such as attitudes to the police and the criminal justice system (CJS). These variables are contained within the non-victim form (NVF) data file. In 2009, the survey was extended to children aged 10-15 years old; one resident of that age range was also selected from the household and asked about their experience of crime and other related topics. The first set of children's data covered January-December 2009 and is held separately under SN 6601. From 2009-2010, the children's data cover the same period as the adult data and are included with the main study.

The Telephone-operated Crime Survey for England and Wales (TCSEW) became operational on 20 May 2020. It was a replacement for the face-to-face CSEW, which was suspended on 17 March 2020 because of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. It was set up with the intention of measuring the level of crime during the pandemic. As the pandemic continued throughout the 2020/21 survey year, questions have been raised as to whether the year ending March 2021 TCSEW is comparable with estimates produced in earlier years by the face-to-face CSEW. The ONS Comparability between the Telephone-operated Crime Survey for England and Wales and the face-to-face Crime Survey for England and Wales report explores those factors that may have a bearing on the comparability of estimates between the TCSEW and the former CSEW. These include survey design, sample design, questionnaire changes and modal changes.

More general information about the CSEW may be found on the ONS Crime Survey for England and Wales web page and for the previous BCS, from the GOV.UK BCS Methodology web page.

History - the British Crime Survey

The CSEW was formerly known as the British Crime Survey (BCS), and has been in existence since 1981. The 1982 and 1988 BCS waves were also conducted in Scotland (data held separately under SNs 4368 and 4599). Since 1993, separate Scottish Crime and Justice Surveys have been conducted. Up to 2001, the BCS was conducted biennially. From April 2001, the Office for National Statistics took over the survey and it became the CSEW. Interviewing was then carried out continually and reported on in financial year cycles. The crime reference period was altered to accommodate this.

Secure Access CSEW data
In addition to the main survey, a series of questions covering drinking behaviour, drug use, self-offending, gangs and personal security, and intimate personal violence (IPV) (including stalking and sexual victimisation) are asked of adults via a laptop-based self-completion module (questions may vary over the years). Children aged 10-15 years also complete a separate self-completion questionnaire. The questionnaires are included in the main documentation, but the data are only available under Secure Access conditions (see SN 7280), not with the main study. In addition, from 2011 onwards, lower-level geographic variables are also available under Secure Access conditions (see SN 7311).

New methodology for capping the number of incidents from 2017-18
The CSEW datasets available from 2017-18 onwards are based on a new methodology of capping the number of incidents at the 98th percentile. Incidence variables names have remained consistent with previously supplied data but due to the fact they are based on the new 98th percentile cap, and old datasets are not, comparability has been lost with years prior to 2012-2013. More information can be found in the 2017-18 User Guide (see SN 8464) and the article ‘Improving victimisation estimates derived from the Crime Survey for England and Wales’.

Variable 'PFA' (Police Force Area):
From 2008-2009 onwards, the BCS variable 'PFA' (Police Force Area) is now only available within the associated dataset SN 6935, British Crime Survey, 2009-2010: Special Licence Access, Low-Level Geographic Data, which is subject to restrictive access conditions; see 'Access' section below.

2009-2010 self-completion modules:
From October 2016, the self-completion questionnaire modules covering drug use, drinking behaviour, and domestic violence, sexual victimisation and stalking are subject to Controlled data access conditions - see SN 7280.

The Pathways to Desistance study was a multi-site study that followed 1,354 serious juvenile offenders from adolescence to young adulthood in two locales between the years 2000 and 2010. Enrolled into the study were adjudicated youths from the juvenile and adult court systems in Maricopa County (Phoenix), Arizona (N=654) and Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania (N=700).Respondents were enrolled and baseline interviews conducted from November 2000 to January 2003. Follow-up interviews were then scheduled with the respondents at 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 48, 60, 72 and 84 months past their baseline interview.The enrolled youth were at least 14 years old and under 18 years old at the time of their committing offense and were found guilty of a serious offense (predominantly felonies, with a few exceptions for some misdemeanor property offenses, sexual assault, or weapons offenses). The baseline interview was conducted within 75 days of the youth's adjudication hearing. For youths in the adult system, the baseline interview was conducted within 90 days of either (a) the decertification hearing in Philadelphia, a hearing at which it is determined if the case will remain in adult court or if it will be sent back to juvenile court; or (b) the adult arraignment hearing in Phoenix, the point in the Arizona adult system at which charges have been formally presented. The aims of the investigation were to identify initial patterns of how serious adolescent offenders stop antisocial activity, to describe the role of social context and developmental changes in promoting these positive changes, and to compare the effects of sanctions and interventions in promoting these changes. The larger goals of the Pathways to Desistance study were to improve decision-making by court and social service personnel and to clarify policy debates about alternatives for serious adolescent offenders. The study relied primarily on self-report information from study participants. Each wave of data collection covered six domains: (1) background characteristics (e.g., demographics, academic achievement, psychiatric diagnoses, offense history, neurological functioning, psychopathy, personality), (2) indicators of individual functioning (e.g., work and school status and performance, substance abuse, mental disorder, antisocial behavior), (3) psychosocial development and attitudes (e.g., impulse control, susceptibility to peer influence, perceptions of opportunity, perceptions of procedural justice, moral disengagement), (4) family context (e.g., household composition, quality of family relationships), (5) personal relationships (e.g., quality of romantic relationships and friendships, peer delinquency, contacts with caring adults), and (6) community context (e.g., neighborhood conditions, personal capital, and community involvement). Information about the measures used to capture this information can be found on the Pathways to Desistance website.